Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

[zyklon]

Yes the Russians claim Zircon is a mach 8ish HCM. The Ukrainians have intercepted at least one Zircon with reasonably solid evidence. The Zircon looks like a Hy-Fly style scramjet intake. It's no doubt very capable and sophisticated weapon. I don't want to take anything away from Russia.

The Ukrainians have intercepted at least one Zircon with reasonably solid evidence>>>>>>>>>It is nonsense to claim that the intercept is a success only by the debris. It will also create debris after the warhead hit the target.

1. How many Zircons has Russia launched against Ukrainian targets since 2022?

2. Have any of these Zircons successfully struck a moving target?

If someone else here knows better, please do let us know. Otherwise guessing a dozen or two, if that, and no, respectfully?

Considering the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of Chinese hypersonic missile tests, and the fact that the YJ-17 and YJ-19 were designed, and have presumably been deployed to deter and engage moving targets — namely major USN and JMSDF surface combatants — the Zircon, while a respectable weapons system, is hardly the benchmark here.

 

[ougoah]

1. How many Zircons has Russia launched against Ukrainian targets since 2022?

2. Have any of these Zircons successfully struck a moving target?

If someone else here knows better, please do let us know. Otherwise guessing a dozen or two, if that, and no, respectfully?

Considering the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of Chinese hypersonic missile tests, and the fact that the YJ-17 and YJ-19 were designed, and have presumably been deployed to deter and engage moving targets — namely major USN and JMSDF surface combatants — the Zircon, while a respectable weapons system, is hardly the benchmark here.

Exactly. Zircon appears to not be any sort of benchmark worth chasing. Both US and China didn't even bother fielding that style of HCM which I've described in post 1714 as 0.5 gen HCM.

US experimented with more advanced HCMs decades ago. China has fielded such a X-43A weapon, only it's capable of being ship launched, hinting that land and air launched HCMs have been in service since ship launching these are typically the hardest and last one to be done. US is still trying to make the HAWC. YJ-19 is HAWC but can be VLS launched. Many steps ahead of the US. This thing has been in service for x length of time while HAWC is still going to be on the drawing board <-> testing <-> drawing board for x length of time.

And yes hitting moving targets accurately is the real test. Not making a HCM fly. I mean, India can put a HCM together but is it any good. Well these questions are impossible to answer for all of these platforms but going on track record and respective science, industry and capabilities of all these countries, my money is US and China are the only ones at the head of the race.

I suspect DF-100 is similar to Linyun-1 experiment on kerosene fuel powered ramjet-scramjet. They didn't even consider it to be as good as DF-21D. These new bad boys are playing on another level. Hypersonic trinity - air breathing cruise (brute force method), boost glider, air breathing glider. Let's see China take all three. China's taken boost glider and now brute force air breathing cruise.

Let's recall that DF-17 (first revealed in service boost glider on earth) and YJ-19 (first revealed in service air breathing hypersonic on earth) are both programs that they are okay with declassifying. They've been in service for some unknown length of time. Everyone else is still designing and testing their 0.5 gens.

I want to edit and note that Iran's "hypersonics" are MaRV ballistic missiles. They have a boost glider of the dual cone type and the Fattah 2 wedge shaped boost glider they revealed in 2023 or 24 iirc.

North Korea has the Hwasongpho 16 which resembles a DF-17 just on a IRBM booster which they revealed around 2022 iirc.

Yet neither NK or Iran have any hypersonic wind tunnels or serious computing power worth a damn. Even India uses Russia's wind tunnels for tests until recently where they're building their own. Outside of Russia being a third major contender in this space, China seems to only be revealing its hand slowly.

 

[bsdnf]

Considering Russia's extremely limited budget, being able to convert the P-800 into a semi-finished HCM like the Zircon is still quite impressive. Perhaps it's still a Soviet legacy.

It can be said that the outside world has overestimated Russia over the past 20 years. Of course, this may be due to the US's propaganda

 

[gelgoog]

The Boeing Hyfly had ZERO successful launches.
So you are saying the Russians successfully made a working weapon out of a FAILED US project.
Let's ignore how the Russians had the P-800 Oniks in service a decade before. Or how the Russians had Mach 20 hypersonic windtunnels while the US had none. Or how the Russians flew a working scramjet first.

The truth is the Russians were the first to put all modern hypersonic weapon types in service. Be it with the Avangard glide vehicle or the Zircon cruise missile.

The fact is the US is behind such hyperpowers as Iran and North Korea into putting hypersonics into service.
These US apologists should just shut up.

 

[ougoah]

The Boeing Hyfly had ZERO successful launches.
So you are saying the Russians successfully made a working weapon out of a FAILED US project.
Let's ignore how the Russians had the P-800 Oniks in service a decade before. Or how the Russians had Mach 20 hypersonic windtunnels while the US had none. Or how the Russians flew a working scramjet first.

Well the P-800 Oniks is no Zircon and while it's a step ahead of western missiles of that era, that doesnt mean the Russians wouldn't and didn't want their own Hyfly equivalent. The admittedly scarce evidence of Zircon's configuration from Ukraine does suggest a Hyfly like missile. China's Linyun-1 is also using the same design approach to at least the intake section which hints at all three using the same type of engine.

Russia had a mach 20 tunnel before US. US barely has one now. They never prioritised hypersonics because they applied their military via the carrier force projection and fought many wars that didn't require it to develop in the direction Russia and China have wrt A2AD. This doesn't mean Russia was more capable than the US. They are clearly, evidently not anymore and probably havent been competitive with either US or China (the late comer to this party) for a good 2 decades now.

Paper projects and mockups and thoughts are one thing. Nazis can claim every hypersonic crown in thoughts if that's the bar we are assessing based on. Russia (Soviets) had countless moon shot projects but non reached fruition until recent decades they needed A2AD and their best effort culminated in Zircon and Avangard. I wouldn't even call Kinzhal one since it's basically a point and shoot rocket that touches mach 6. Even the air launched Skybolt was more ambitious albeit less of an effective platform and ancient in comparison to kinzhal!

The truth is the Russians were the first to put all modern hypersonic weapon types in service. Be it with the Avangard glide vehicle or the Zircon Cruise missiles.

You may be right but DF-17 we know has been in service since at least 2019. We don't have any decent evidence to suggest Avangard reached service before DF-17. They never even showed it, okay many reasons for this but when did they officially state Avangard is in service? I recall it was 2020 or 2021? But you're right in saying that Zircon is first HCM in service. No one else officially had one in service before Zircon and Zircon is said to be mach 8 by Russia so fair enough. I got caught up in my own personal doubts at the I want to call "Hyfly" style HCMs which I personally suspect DF-100 to be and if DF-100 is said by China pretty semi-officially to be NOT hypersonic in cruise, I started to doubt Zircon.

 

[gelgoog]

Skybolt was canceled before it ever entered service. It was also innacurate by design. Only good as a nuclear delivery method.

Kinzhal is actually useable.

The Soviets had rocket ballistic missiles like the Kh-22 at the same time Skybolt was developed. Except they were actually useable and worked.

Avangard was tracked by US satellites on like 2016 I think. It is known to work.
The only question the Russians had was about the launch vehicle. R36M2 was made in Ukraine, UR-100 was obsolete, Sarmat was nowhere. Miniaturizing the Avangard GV to put in something like RS-26 Rubezh would also take time.

They ended up putting the Avangard GV on the UR-100 but this is suboptimal.

 

[ougoah]

Skybolt was canceled before it ever entered service. It was also innacurate by design. Only good as a nuclear delivery method.

Kinzhal is actually useable.

Avangard was tracked by US satellites on like 2016 I think. It is known to work.
The only question the Russians had was about the launch vehicle. R36M2 was made in Ukraine, UR-100 was obsolete, Sarmat was nowhere. Miniaturizing the Avangard RV to put in something like RS-26 Rubezh would also take time.

Yep and I didn't say Skybolt was a service weapon or serviceable. Just that ALBM is not a new thing Kinzhal perfected. Nor was it that much of a challenge hence why I dont rate Kinzhal in the same level as the other "hypersonics". That was the only point I tried to make with the 1960s Skybolt project.

While Avangard was tracked by US in 2016, US was tracking Chinese hypersonic gliders since 2013. It doesn't mean much if we don't know the thing they were tracking, its performance and readiness. This doesn't prove Avangard was in service in 2016. Putin said Russia had Avangard in 2018. Assuming this as official disclosure and that this disclosure from Putin is indication of Avangard having reached service (if not earlier), then indeed it precedes the known earliest official announcement of service for DF-17 which was 2019. This is just official word on a weapon being in service. Weapon A could have reached service in 2010 but announced in 2020 while Weapon B in service 2019 and announced 2019. Doesn't mean Weapon B was first.

Russia however did have all the tools to have fielded their glider before China though. Both were all in the same decade at least and possibly even the same adjacent years.

I guess my disregard for Avangard and Zircon comes from Russia having never even shown the world a glimpse of just their shape. Meanwhile US and China are both more secretive nations than Russia when it comes to cutting edge military programs and both US and China have been very comfortable showing the wares they allow the public to see.

Russia showed off T-50 prototypes over a decade before Su-57 reached RuAF. Russia showed off the T-14 over a decade before it can even be produced in any real number. Same with SAMs. Meanwhile China showed the new armoured vehicles when they've already hit service and production is probably gearing up. SAMs of essentially more types than the rest of the world combined as they already hit service. J-20 first prototype sight 2011, 6 years before first unit in PLAAF. US is somewhere in between. Russia certainly shows off more (post Soviet era) and is more willing to show the world. And yet not even a glimpse at what avangard and zircon really look like. Every other missile they've shown off well before becoming a mainstay.

I get that these are somewhat strategic weapons but if US and even China are comfortable showing some, either US and China's no shows are far more advanced than the shows or Russia not showing is to take advantage of ambiguity to improve image of strength in these times where it does need to present strength rather than hide strength. Avangard at most is just a plain glider similar to DF-17, maybe smaller, maybe larger. Meanwhile China's continued hundreds of hypersonic flights and up to mach 30 tunnels with more computing power in single cities than all of Russia.

 

[gelgoog]

Zircon has been in service for several years.

It would not be too surprising if the YJ-19 was better in some way being a newer missile.

But from what I understand the Russians call the Avangard and Zircon first generation hypersonics for a reason. Their replacements are already in development.

As for Russian compute power for simulations don't assume the Russians have no supercomputers just because they don't publish about it. Ever since the US started sanctioning companies like T-Platforms all the public info on supercomputers in Russia went dark.

 

[ougoah]

Zircon has been in service for several years.

It would not be too surprising if the YJ-19 was better in some way being a newer missile.

But from what I understand the Russians call the Avangard and Zircon first generation hypersonics for a reason. Their replacements are already in development.

As for Russian compute power for simulations don't assume the Russians have no supercomputers just because they don't publish about it. Ever since the US started sanctioning companies like T-Platforms all the indo on supercomputers in Russia went dark.

Yea look I dont underestimate Russians or even Russia. It has some top, top tier talent and given the resources countries like China and US have, I think Russia would produce "cooler" and more advanced weapons and technology than China or US.

I don't think Russia is in this MIC race anymore. Nor is it racing in any of the major industries. Many of its top tier talents have gone to Europe and US and continue to. In the funding, national development, talent acquisition and retention domains, Russia is running slower and decelerating. Europe is barely breaking even and US China seem to be both running on fumes but still making progress. The only ones accelerating. In this sort of environment I just dont see how a Russia can keep up. It is far less well funded, running a war, has far fewer talents than US or China and has far lower availability of resources like computing power, access to equipment (sanctions), top tier modern institutions and facilities.

Russia's new strategy appears to be preserve itself and wait it out. US will degrade like the UK has. China will be a decent enough neighbour. EU will become more Russia tolerant. Then it will make moves after all the current animosity is more settled. It has several things going for it. All the resources and land one could want and enough of an intelligent, capable population to exploit better times.

 

[gelgoog]

It depends on what sector you are talking about. Russia is ahead in hypersonics and nuclear power. But they are behind, a lot behind, in other sectors.
Russia is behind in electronics, piston engines, EVs, etc.